درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

When parties to a dispute select arbitration as their means of resolving the conflict, they relyon evidentiary materials to present claims or defenses. In this context, the likelihood of oneparty engaging in fraudulent practices in the presentation of evidence and utilizing fraudulentmaterials to influence the arbitration process is significant. According to the arbitration practicesof the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), it has been established that an arbitratorlacks independent and direct authority to uncover such fraudulent evidence. However, whenthe opposing party challenges the evidence as fraudulent and raises allegations of fraud in thearbitration, the arbitrator is obliged to address this objection and examine the validity of eachpiece of evidence according to its nature. Failure by the arbitrator to consider such evidence canundermine the credibility and value of the arbitral award. When the award issued by the arbitrationauthority is tainted by falsehood and fraud, it loses its enforceability. Therefore, delineating thescope of the arbitrator’s authority in the face of fraudulent evidence is of paramount importance.Analyzing arbitration practices and the conduct of arbitrators, particularly within the frameworkof the ICC when confronted with fraudulent evidence, will ultimately contribute to theestablishment of a unified procedure. This article employs a descriptive-analytical methodology,utilizing library resources to address the question of what the scope of the arbitrator’s jurisdictionis in uncovering fraudulent evidence.